After all, we live in a culture where drivers pull guns on other drivers who offend them by driving too slowly or not signaling a turn soon enough; musicians feel compelled to leap up in the middle of awards ceremonies to criticize those whom they feel have been unfairly honored for their work; and even congressmen simply cannot control their egos or their mouths while the president is talking.

Bad manners are running rampant in our culture.

So it was heartening to hear about the civil discourse that took place last week at a panel discussion on homosexuality in downtown Kalamazoo that featured six Christian pastors. The panel was moderated by the Rev. Beth McLaren, associate rector at St. Luke’s Episcopal Church, and featured the Rev. Matthew Laney, pastor of Kalamazoo’s First Congregational United Church of Christ; the Rev. Douglas Vernon, senior pastor of Kalamazoo’s First United Methodist Church; the Rev. John Byl, pastor of Kalamazoo’s Immanuel Fellowship Church; the Rev. Paul Naumann, of Portage’s St. Michael Lutheran Church; the Rev. Jeff Porte of Kalamazoo’s Third Reformed Church; and the Rev. Jim Lucas, chaplain of the Grand Rapids-based Gays in Faith Together.

Granted, ministers tend to be fairly well-behaved creatures. The public and, one assumes, a higher power hold them to a certain standard and expect them to be generally polite. But, thankfully, news reports said the more than 800 people who turned out to hear them discuss homosexuality also behaved well.

That might not have been the case, because the discussion took place against the backdrop of what has been a divisive Kalamazoo ballot proposal to ban discrimination against homosexuals in employment, housing and public accommodations. Voters will decide the issue on Nov. 3.

The topic of homosexuality stirs great emotions in people, and great emotions often lead to great, big heated words — as can easily be seen on the letters pages of the Kalamazoo Gazette. Neither side of the discussion is very happy with the other side. It would not have been surprising if the vitriol in the letters had spilled over into the panel discussion and the audience.

It would have been “news” if a fight had broken out at the meeting. What happened, instead, was even more newsworthy: People engaged in a civil discussion of ideas and beliefs. I don’t know if minds were changed that night. Probably not, since that’s not usually how the world works.

But to even hope that minds will be swayed one way or the other, minds have to be open to discussion, to engage in the process of not just talking but listening to friends and neighbors, the people on the other side of the political spectrum and those who live different lifestyles.

To begin to have any understanding of what one person’s faith means to that person or how discrimination might be affecting the lives of others, you have to be able to sit — respectfully — in the same room. You have to be able to sit next to each other, look into each other’s eyes and recognize the humanity that is there.